Search This Blog

Wednesday, 11 April 2018


     Which pretrib rapture view is correct? C. I. Scofield's? John Walvoord's? Hal Lindsey's? Someone else's?
     Walvoord (and Dwight Pentecost) say that the ones "taken" in Matt. 24:40-41 are the wicked taken in judgment at the end of the tribulation while those "left" are left alive.
     Lindsey disagrees with Walvoord and Pentecost and states that the ones "taken" are church members raptured before the tribulation while those "left" are the wicked who are left on earth to go through the tribulation.
     Producers of the "Left Behind" movies also agree with Lindsey (and disagree with Walvoord and Pentecost) that a pretrib rapture takes away the church and that the ones left behind are the wicked.
     Lindsey declares that John actually left the earth and went to heaven in Rev. 4:1. Walvoord and Scofield disagree with Lindsey and maintain that John's body stayed on Patmos and was never raptured away.
     Lindsey sees the tribulation in chapters 4-19 in Revelation while Scofield sees it in chapters 11-18 and Henry Thiessen sees it in chapters 6-19.
     Lindsey holds that Revelation's 24 elders represent the church while Harry Ironside says they represent Old Testament as well as New Testament saints.
     Lindsey believes that Rev. 13's second beast will be a Jew. But Walvoord declares there's no evidence that either one of those beasts is Jewish.
     Lindsey writes that Rev. 3:10 is proof of a pretrib rapture. Walvoord, however, writes that using Rev. 3:10 for this purpose is up for debate.
     While pretribs have long seen prophetic significance in the Jewish feasts in Leviticus 23, there has been disagreement on which feast is symbolic of a pretrib rapture.
     Scofield based his pretrib rapture on the feast of the firstfruits, No. 3.
     Although Walvoord can't find anything in the Old Testament suggestive of a pretrib rapture, his 1966 book based a pretrib aspect of the first resurrection on feast No. 3.
     Although Lindsey doesn't reveal which feast is the significant one, his pretrib rapture lies between feast No. 3 and feast No. 7.
     Another pretrib date-setter, Edgar Whisenant, said in 1988 that the rapture would happen in 1988. His rapture was based on feast No. 5.
     A number of years ago David Webber proclaimed on his "Southwest Radio Church of the Air" broadcast that the Antichrist will be revealed to believers before they go up in the rapture. On the same day, however, broadcaster Oliver B. Greene stated on "The Gospel Hour" that the Antichrist will never be revealed to the church before the rapture!
     Nowadays "Dr." Tommy Ice is promoting the discredited opinion that II Thess. 2:3's "falling away" (from the faith) really means "falling up to heaven" (in a pretrib rapture!). Even his own late mentor, Dr. John Walvoord, writes in "The Blessed Hope and the Tribulation" (p. 125) that this recent "view has not met with general acceptance by either pretribulationists or posttribulationists" and says that this verse "refers to doctrinal defection"! (Google "Walvoord Melts Ice" for more details on this.)
     My book "The Incredible Cover-up" has an entire chapter titled "A House Divided" which shows that pretribs have long disagreed with each other on practically every point and subpoint in their 19th century end time theory!
     Finally, I should add that before 1830 there was never any disagreement among Bible scholars over pretrib rapture doctrine for one paramount reason:
     There was no pretrib rapture!


colin said...

"Which pre-trib rapture view is correct?"

NONE of the above!
for there is NO such thing as any "pre-trib rapture view" that is correct!

As a post-tribulation believer; on the Lord's Second Advent, it is noteworthy that the variations on a theme Macpherson has discovered, simply don't exist within theologians that believe and teach Christ's post-tribulation Return! That is not to say that there aren't areas of disagreement on unfulfilled prophecy, far from it, but the points of disagreement in this article are simply incredulous!

Rather than trying to convince Christendom of their various schools of error, they should drop the whole sorry pre-trib scheme altogether!

God bless.

Irv said...

I'm wondering what kind of chilling world event would have to occur to cause Lindsey, Ice and other pretrib hawkers to finally abandon their unbiblical pretrib prognostications!

Treena Gisborn said...

The whole sorry subject of the pre-trib rapture is a complete waste of time. (Ephesians 5:16). I wonder how these so called scholars will answer to the Lord for their elaborate departures from the scriptures? Are they stewards of God's grace, or do they sow confusion and put stumbling blocks in the way?

"As each has received a gift, use it to serve one another, as good stewards of God’s varied grace: whoever speaks, as one who speaks oracles of God; whoever serves, as one who serves by the strength that God supplies—in order that in everything God may be glorified through Jesus Christ. To him belong glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen." 1 Peter 4:10-11.

God bless

Irv said...

Amen to both Colin and Treena for their enlightening and energizing thoughts. God bless you also.